Marin Voice: Plan Bay Area means big changes for Marin

MARIN COUNTY is about to embark on the biggest high-density housing explosion in its history. It's called Plan Bay Area.

Yet most residents remain in the dark.

Plan Bay Area sounds good on paper. It aims to reduce Greenhouse Gases (GHG) by building high-density housing near mass transit, claiming it doesn't usurp local zoning control. But the facts tell a different story.

Local city Housing Elements must comply with the Association of Bay Area Government Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

So local governments are compelled to select RHNA sites near mass transit and allow for compact, high-density, mixed-use development at state-mandated housing sites.

Residents need look no further than the high density housing policies being crafted locally to see Plan Bay Area's influence over local control. Add SB375's streamlining of environmental protection regulations, and Plan Bay Area could give the keys to your neighborhood's open space to big development.

Plan Bay Area also promises to reduce GHGs.

Unfortunately, the plan is based on questionable assumptions regarding job and population growth, and environmental impacts.

For example, the plan's draft EIR doesn't consider California's new "Pavley" higher miles-per-gallon standards or the new federal environmental standards (e.g. 54.5 mpg for cars and light trucks), which will reduce car and light truck emissions more than any of Plan Bay Area's alternatives, even if we do nothing.

The DEIR also uses outdated 2005 GHG emissions data.

Plan Bay Area fails to assess water supply and waste treatment systems required for the thousands of new homes planned.

Further, it fails to assess the risks to endangered and protected habitats, such as creek, bay, and wetlands damage from water diversions and drawdowns needed to accommodate the massive development.

What cumulative impact will water diversions have on wildlife? How will existing water resources supply proposed development? Without considering Marin's water constraints, how can anyone predict the magnitude of adverse impacts of Plan Bay Area?

And the plan "streamlines" state environmental requirements for PDA developments, so by the time we know the impacts it will be too late.

The plan's projected growth rates for Marin County are unrealistic.

The state Department of Finance projects much lower job and population growth. And the Pitkin-Myers University of Southern California report notes, —... much lower population growth is foreseen" than state population projections.

The plan's GHG projections are flawed.

Research by the Australian Conservation Foundation indicates that the type of development proposed by Plan Bay Area will increase, not decrease. Plan Bay Area's proposed "solutions" for Marin County could produce 2.5 times the GHG emissions of single family home development and three times the GHG emissions of attached, townhouse development.

The plan's conclusion that Transit Oriented Development (TOD) reduces GHG emissions is questionable.

The methodologies used in the draft EIR should be reviewed independently. What primary research on real-world TOD projects, as opposed to simulated scenarios and computer models based on assumptions, were used to assess the accuracy, reliability, and validity of the draft EIR conclusions?

As presented, Plan Bay Area and its environmental review fail to inform the public, elected leaders and key decisions-makers as to Plan Bay Area's true economic, social, and environmental impacts.

Residents have been bombarded with pro-Plan Bay Area material. I encourage residents to read the "other side" at www.CitizenMarin.org